This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
HTML currently says UAs should allow the following: """ Edit form controls nested inside editing hosts When an editable form control is edited, the changes must be reflected in both its current value and its default value. For input elements this means updating the defaultValue IDL attribute as well as the value IDL attribute; for select elements it means updating the option elements' defaultSelected IDL attribute as well as the selected IDL attribute; for textarea elements this means updating the defaultValue IDL attribute as well as the value IDL attribute. (Updating the default* IDL attributes causes content attributes to be updated as well.) """ At the face-to-face, we agreed that this is more or less how form elements should behave in contenteditable. This needs to be specced in more detail.
Should all form controls have a .undoManager though?
I dunno, I'm still happily ignorant of all this undo manager stuff. :) CCing Ryosuke and Ehsan in case they have opinions.
(In reply to comment #1) > Should all form controls have a .undoManager though? I don't think so. In my current specification of undoscope, unless the author specifically adds undoscope attribute all nodes in a document share the same undo manager. This is to match the current behavior of major UAs.
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Should all form controls have a .undoManager though? > > I don't think so. In my current specification of undoscope, unless the author > specifically adds undoscope attribute all nodes in a document share the same > undo manager. This is to match the current behavior of major UAs. I agree with Aryeh. Also, I think that we need to say something about how things like <button> elements should be edited. Do we want them to accept arbitrary content?
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > (In reply to comment #1) > > > Should all form controls have a .undoManager though? > > > > I don't think so. In my current specification of undoscope, unless the author > > specifically adds undoscope attribute all nodes in a document share the same > > undo manager. This is to match the current behavior of major UAs. > > I agree with Aryeh. s/Aryeh/Ryosuke/ :-)
Buttons should certainly accept at least inline markup. That's the point of them. Per HTML5, buttons can contain any non-interactive phrasing content, which seems reasonable. To properly specify that, we'd need explicit special cases -- e.g., createLink inside a button should fail. This is a long-term project.